netdev - RE: "tipc: fix socket timer deadlock" to stable?

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <DB5PR0701MB1958BA77574C012D96969F079A3D0@DB5PR0701MB1958.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Tue, 21 Mar 2017 11:35:27 +0000
From:   Jon Maloy <jon.maloy@...csson.com>
To:     Tommi Rantala <tommi.t.rantala@...ia.com>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
CC:     "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, GUNA <gbalasun@...il.com>,
        "Ying Xue" <ying.xue@...driver.com>
Subject: RE: "tipc: fix socket timer deadlock" to stable?



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tommi Rantala [mailto:tommi.t.rantala@...ia.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2017 03:50 AM
> To: Jon Maloy <jon.maloy@...csson.com>; netdev@...r.kernel.org
> Cc: David S. Miller <davem@...emloft.net>; GUNA <gbalasun@...il.com>;
> Ying Xue <ying.xue@...driver.com>
> Subject: Re: "tipc: fix socket timer deadlock" to stable?
> 
> On 13.03.2017 14:18, Jon Maloy wrote:
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Tommi Rantala [mailto:tommi.t.rantala@...ia.com]
> >>
> >> We're seeing this tipc deadlock in 4.4.y, that was fixed in the
> >> mainline commit
> >> f1d048f24e66ba85d3dabf3d076cefa5f2b546b0 "tipc: fix socket timer
> >> deadlock".
> >>
> >> Could/should this patch also be included in the stable kernel trees?
> >
> > I think it should. If action is required by me here (?) I will repost the commit
> for 4.4.
> >
> > ///jon
> 
> Hi Jon, yes, please do repost the commit. After reading through
> Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.txt, you probably want to send it
> with suitable subject-prefix so that the patch is not lost in the noise.
> 
Ok. I'll do that. Just have to do proper testing first.

///jon

> >> I just checked that the patch applies on top of 4.4.53, only the line
> >> numbers are different compared to the upstream commit.
> 
> (Actually there is also a small change in the patch context.)
> 
> -Tommi